Request for MOTU Council to consider Marco Rodrigues (Kmos) not potentially suitable for MOTU

[Scott Kitterman]

On Saturday 08 December 2007 13:08, Michael Bienia wrote:
> [ First this is my *own* opinion and should not be mixed up with any
> 'official' MC statement. ]

Thank you for this.  I'd like to encourage yourself and the other MC members 
to have as much of this discussion in public as possible.  However it works 
out, I think it important that the result be fair and the process reasonably 
transparent.

> This is a very difficult and delicate topic and I haven't yet make up my
> mind what's the best way to deal with it. But I've to agree that the MC
> has to deal with it somehow and soon.
>
> As it's the fist time such measures are needed we have no procedures for
> it at all. So we are very careful as this will have a greater impact as
> only to the actual problem. But we shouldn't postpone a decision
> infinitely either as it might make some people not take the MC
> seriously. It's difficult to find the right balance.

I can understand.  I put a lot of effort into asking for a balanced solution.  
It would have been much simpler to just ask to have him completely thrown 
out.

> I haven't yet also come to a decision about the proposed solution.
> On the one hand it's a very extreme solution to disable/limit someones
> LP account as this cuts him off of all Ubuntu-related contributions and
> activities.

This is true, but some of his most difficult actions to deal with have been 
caused by filing masses of mostly bad sync bugs, even after having been 
warned.  I don't think anything less will be effective.

> I'd prefer to use such measures as a last resort and have tried several
> other solutions before I agree to such a solution.

We've done that already.  

> In particular as a first step this is IMHO a very drastic solution.
> Additionally there was no 'official' warning from the MC towards him in
> the past (at least I don't know of any).

This is not, IMO, a first step, but a last one.  I don't think you want the MC 
to become a formal disciplinary body.  I would also encourage you to consider 
the likely consequence of such a decision.  If it becomes clear that abusive 
behavior will only be stopped after the MC issues an official warning and 
then the problem recurrs, people (I would expect) will ask for such warnings 
earlier and more frequently.

> I also don't want to leave the impression that we have lost control
> about the situation (I hope this is not the case) and trying now to
> force an improvment.

That's my impression.  Personally, I think that the behavior in this case has 
been sufficiently egregious that someone in leadership should have taken up 
this problem and tried to solve it.

> On the other hand I understand that this is not a normal situation and I
> also understand the feelings of some MOTUs towards Kmos and their need
> for a solution. I could also understand if some MOTUs shorten their MOTU
> activities (or step down from them) if the MC doesn't come to a suitable
> solution for them soon though I would regret it.

I've already done so.  I believe others have too, but will let them speak for 
themselves.

> But this doesn't make the decision easier (only harder). I also don't
> want that it looks like the MC was forced towards this solution for the
> greater benefit of all MOTUs as this would lessen the position of the MC
> (which isn't currently the best either). The MC should stay independent
> from compulsions from MOTUs.

Personally, I'm not trying to make any compulsions.  It is a fact that I've 
substantially reduced my involvement in Ubuntu development for Hardy as 
compared to Gutsy.  This is not the only reason, but it's one of the big 
ones.

You (the MC) have to decide what kind of community you want.  If Kmos is what 
you want, then I'll have to decide how much involvement I want in that kind 
of community.

I would encourage you (and the other MC members) to seek wider input from 
other MOTUs.  This decision shouldn't be made just on your perspectives or 
mine, but based on the consensus of ubuntu-developers.  I will note that the 
first large scale problems in Gutsy started shortly after DIF.  DIF for Hardy 
is in 5 days.

Scott K